Allowed

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Mian v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Apr 2022CR. MISC./20581/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna allowed the petitioner's application for bail in a case involving offences under sections 324, 307, 394 of IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act, granting release after noting parity with co-accused and lack of TIDP for recovered items.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the Additional Sessions Judge-22th, East Champaran at Motihari.

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Mian Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20581 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2020 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Mian, aged about 25 years (M) S/O Mulajim Mian @ Molajim Mian R/o village- Nayak Tola, P.S.- Adapur, District- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr.Umesh Chandra Verma, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 27-04-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon to do so by the office.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in Adapu r PS Case No. 74 of 2020, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 324,307, 394 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

Since 07-07-2020 the petitioner is stated to be in custody. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court under order dated 02-08-2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20581 of 2022(2) dt.27-04-2022 2/3

¶16

9130 of 2021.

¶17

Petitioner’s counsel submits that the other co-accused persons, namely, Arun Kumar Gupta, Munna Patel and Rajan Tiwari @ Rajan Kumar Tiwari have since been allowed bail. Claiming parity with the said accused persons, based on Annexure-3 series, wherein, the orders passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. Nos. 8857 of 2021 and 32235 of 2021 and 65709 of 2021 have been annexed, it is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to bail. Learned counsel further submits that the recovered jewellery has never been put on the Test Identification Parade. This fact has also been taken note of in the earlier order of rejection dated 02-08-2021.

¶18

The learned APP representing the State has opposed the prayer for bail. He has drawn the attention of the Court towards the last rejection which was based on consideration of the material appearing in the course of investigation that there is recovery of alleged looted articles based on petitioner’s confession.

¶19

Considering the rival submissions, the fact that recovered jewellery has not been put on Test Identification Parade, the period of custody in the meantime; and the claim based on parity, this Court, for the purposes of grant of bail, is

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20581 of 2022(2) dt.27-04-2022 3/3

¶21

inclined to accept the submissions advanced by the petitioner’s counsel. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-22th, East Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Adapur P.S. Case No. 74 of 2020, Sessions Trial No. 710 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

¶23

(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.

¶24

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶25

shyambihari/-

¶26

U T

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Mian v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Kalam @ Kalam Mian v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avinash Kumar Singh, Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ramesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Nawal Kishor Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Om Prakash Singh Vs the State of Bihar